BinduMadhav

Ah, my dear Ravilochan . Continuing our tradition of bashing the Smartas, right? Keep at it, my friend. One day you will convert everyone to the Sri Krishna Sampradaya or you will understand that great scholars like Shankaracharya saw no difference between Vishnu and Shiva. Both are born out of our fertile imaginations. But hey, each to his own. If you feel the same compulsion that Christian Missionaries feel about making this world fall in love with Jesus Christ and no one else, more power to you. Of course, in your case, you are trying to make everyone fall in love with Vishnu or Krishna. Not that it makes any difference to me. I already love Krishna. Bindu Madhav

Chant Krishna's name every day any time you want to. Why bother about the day of the week? Why worry about its efficacy? The pleasure you get out of chanting it should be reward enough. Once you truly understand the pleasure of becoming immersed in Krishna, you will not have any problem concentrating on Him; the problem will be getting out of that mode.

Sri Krishna might have had bluish tinge (I would like to meet the person who remembers seeing him) but he had dark skin. That is why he was called Krishna. In Samskrit, Krishna stands for 'dark' male, Krishnaa is a dark skinned female; Draupadi was called Krishnaa. Heard of Krishna Yajurveda versus Shukla Yajurveda? Krishnaveni is a woman with dark braid.

According to my friend Rajashekhar Sharma, Hinduism does not recognize the week. That is a purely Judeo-Christian concept and somehow it found its way into Hinduism. Hinduism does not need a week since we use Lunar calendar with the phases of the moon indicating the day of the Krishna Paksha or Shukla Paksha. That being said, the modern day Hindus have translated Sunday, Monday etc into Bhaanuvaara (Or Ravivaara), Somavaara etc. Various customs and rituals have developed around the system of weekdays. What days of the week are most religious? For devotees of Shiva, the Monday is most important; for devotees of Lalitha, Friday is the most important. Similarly, the devotees of Hanumaan, Krishna and others have adopted their own special day for their deities.

Krishnaaya Vishvaroopaaya Devakinandanaayacha Shivabhaktaaya Mitraaya Gitaamritaduhe Namah Please explain the above verse and please give the source. ------------------------- The source is myself. Do you still need an explanation? Here it is. To Krishna, the One with Viraat Roopa or Vishva Roopa (since He represents the whole universe), Who makes Mother Devaki happy; The One who is a great devotee of Shiva (according to Mahabharath, Anushaasana Parva), Our greatest friend, and One who provided the sweet milk of Gita (in the form of Bhagavad-Gita), I salute. Krishna is my most favorite. He was a mortal, no matter what fundies believe (I read a funny note from someone that said he stopped aging at 16 or 24 or something like that); and He was, in His mortal life a great devotee of Lord Shiva. His greatness is truly brought down by no less than His own devotees, who have described Him variously of having illicit relations with Radha, having a thousand wives, etc etc. All a bunch of lies. Krishna was the greatest mortal ever to be born on earth and the only mortal worth worshipping. Read one of my earlier articles on Shiva and Vishnu.

Sephiroth wrote: _________ Arresting them won't work. The Terrorist orginizations simply recruits another and Police will take too much time tracking one person down. During that time, bombs will go and people will die. Solution :- 1. KILL all Suspected Terrorist. 2. Arrest and convicts with heavy jail sentences to those who help terrorists - like family members. 3. Stop wasting time with trials. I don't see what is the use of trials when terrorists boldly admit their actions to preach Islam. Just carry the sentences whenever and whereever they are found. Law and Order is for people to be Humane with each other. But when dealing with people who do not care whether they die or not or whether innocent people are hurt, Law and Order is not needed - Swift hand of JUSTICE is needed. -------------------------- Wow, my good man, I really think you have shown your true colors today. I always suspected that something is wrong with you, but today you proved it. Kill all suspected terrorists? What if they suspect you too?

Bhadramoorthi, You have written a nice reply. It is true that properly trained Hindus recognize only ONE God and all the forms that we worship, Shiva, Vishnu, Devi Parvathi, etc are all His manifestations (or our imaginations depending upon the perspective of the person). I also trust you when you say that you found this story in Jyothisha Rathnam. A few comments. Lalitha is always supposed to be a Shodashi (a 16 year old); when someone portrays her as a 8-year old, alarm bells for the accuracy of the tale toll for me. Secondly, I have studied Lalitha Sahasra Namam, Vishnu Sahasra Namam and the Shiva Sahasra Namam, the latter two from Mahabharatha. Among the three of them, I find Shiva Sahasra Namam to be the most beautiful and profound. It portrays God in the best possible way. This is just a comment on my own personal view; no one needs to agree with it. Thirdly, you write: "Eventhough Vishnu names have only one part in 1000000 of the greatness of Devi-names, it is enough for us humans.Hence Sankaracharya wrote ..." For your information, one million is still a finite number. But the number 1000 represents infinity in Hinduism.

Sephiroth says... "When Veda Vyasa interpreted Shivatees as Tamasic, it means that they live accepting Ignorance mode and overcoming it, NOT allowing it to overcome them." Can you please provide a reference here? I have read Mahabharatha several times and I don't remember Veda Vyasa calling Shaivites 'Tamasik'.

Ranga wrote: "Better you dont believe God,become a true atheist and say "Rama never existed" rather than cunningly barking at him." I like your standing up for Sri Rama, whom I greatly admire. But you are not thinking straight here. People may believe that Rama never existed and yet be Theistic. Rama's existence or non-existence has no bearing on whether God exists or not. Sri Rama was just a human being. I have to admit that he did have a few earthly faults. Why get upset at Rajashekharji for pointing them out? After all, he agrees that Lord Rama had many wonderful virtues that many of us can only aspire for.

Dvaitin wrote: ------------ Besides, who cares if India is majority Hindu. Are they majority Krishna bhaktas? If not, I couldn't care less whether India survives or not. India exists for Krishna's sake, not the other way around. As long as 'hindus' refuse to accept Krishna, I'll refuse to accept India and hindus. The reason why India has degraded is because they've given up on krishna, so Krishna has given up on them. ------------------------- I am a great devotee of Krishna myself, but such posts reek of disdain for others and should be condemned. If the majority of India do not worship Krishna, does it mean that India should be condemned? Then how about the rest of the world? Not too many people outside India worship Krishna; so shouldn't Krishna give up or destroy the destroy the rest of the world too? ----------------------- So I don't give a camel's a$$ if pakis thrash India, they prolly deserve it. ----------------------- Boy, you must be a caucasian ISKCONite male living in America not to care if Pakis thrash India. You know what is unforgivable? Posts such as yours.

Guest 2 wrote: ------------------------ I actually think that the Upanishads have more of an influence on modern Hinduism, that the Vedas (at least the samhitas and brahmanas). ------------------------ It is true that when Upanishads came about, they had a profound effect on the masses. As a result of this, the Karmakaanda was pushed to the background. Which really is not so bad because the Karmakaanda consisted of sacrifices with animals and some truly unacceptable practices. You are right that the Upanishads have had more of an impact on modern Hindus (and Non-Hindus alike.) But one cannot completely dismiss the Samhitas and Aranyakas. Many of the verses from the Samhitas are adopted into our Puja process. For Shaivites, Rudram (Namakam) is very important and they recite them with great devotion whenever an opportunity arises. Vaishnavites use verses like Purusha Suktam, Sri Suktam, Vishnu Suktam and many others that are directly from the Vedas. The Brahmanas are no longer used because they formed the Karma Kanda.

Atanu wrote: *****Atanu, specially, is so annoying with his cut-and-paste mode of communication without saying anything substantial.******** This is a good observation. Atanu should mend his ways. Thanks Guru Dasan. ------------------------- Somehow I missed Mr.Guru Dasan's note on how Atanu is boring. I could not disagree more. I think Atanu's posts are scholarly and a pleasure to read. So were Ravilochan's posts.

Atanu wrote: "It is amusing. You only said (in that infamous post of yours)that you imagine Narayana with a gada." I did, my dear Atanu. I like to imagine Lord Vishnu that way or Lord Krishna with a lovely flute creating lilting tunes. But I acknowledge that Sriman Narayana with his Shankha, Chakra, Gada and Padma is a lovely imagination in the fertile minds of our ancestors. Not likely our handsome Krishna, my most favorite. He was certainly a historical figure. I have to congratulate both Ravilochanan and you, Atanu, for the amazing amount of scholarly knowledge you both have displayed. It is marevelous and I have loved every post. Hope both of you will keep up the good work and help the rest of us improve our knowledge as well.

Thiru wrote: -------------------------- just curious to know what brought this sudden change into Bindhu..... Bindhu i would be delighted if u could share ur experience which stood a cause for the change in u..... -------------------------- My dear Thiru, I have been taught by my (Vaishnavite) Acharya that Lord Vishnu is The Supreme. The stand taken by Ravilochan, myself and others is nothing unusual. But I always had doubts. Like I have said elsewhere, I read Rajashekharji's posts in considerable depth recently and began to see the big picture a little better. The seeds had been planted in my mind many moons ago. But they took root recently.

Ratheesh wrote: -------------------- god created humans and humans acknowledge god's existance (well, some of us do). In order to visualize or conceptualize god in our minds and lives, we conceptualize aspects of the sum totality Brahman and create versions of brahman which we called preserver and auspicious (vishnu and shiva) We have creatd the images of shiva and vishnu in order for us to see it in front of our faces and worship appiopriately. however, we must not forget that brahman is formless and we have given brahman a form by creating images that fit our neccessities for understanding. We make shiva and vishnu look as they do. there is no real man walking around looking like that, except the men who do it purposely to look like shiva or vishnu. -------------------------- I fully agree with the comments above. Good perception, Ratheesh. One of the 'Vachanas' or sayings of a Veerashaiva states: "According to one's Feelings And according to one's devotion, As one would like to see Him Appears Lord Shiva to him To devotees of Hari, He appears as Hari To devotees of Hara, He appears as Hara" Long time ago, I asked a Swamiji (Paramananda Bharati, if anyone can recognize the name) why Paraashara had to write Vishnu Puraana to create additional confusion among the Hindus. The Swamiji replied that Vishnu is one flavor of God, just as Parashiva is another and Mother Parvati is yet another. We are free to choose Saguna Brahman in the form that we particularly like. I had thought long and hard about his little lecture. Later, when I read Rajashekharji's very interesting posts, the jig-saw puzzle started falling in proper places. By Its very definition, Brahman does not need us. We need Brahman. I suspect He does not care whether we imagine Him in the form of Shiva or Vishnu. We derive the pleasure and benefit by worshipping Him in the form that we give Him. Since He is the Infinitely Mature and Powerful Being, He will, I am sure, perfectly understand our little prejudices and does not mind our calling Him Shiva or Vishnu or Devi. What bothered me considerably about the arguments between Ravilochan and Atanu was that they both were arguing for Vishnu and Shiva respectively; almost like little children saying 'My Daddy is Bigger than Yours'. I had plenty of fun both reading their posts and pointing out some of Atanu's faulty logic from a Vaishnavite's perspective; but at the same time, I was truly dismayed by Ravilochanan insisting that Vishnu is the Supreme Lord. I never expressed it because I was learning a lot during the whole process and I did not want to interrupt their thoughts. But I learnt a lot about the mindsets of Vaishnavites from Ravilochan and about the mindsets of Shaivites from Atanu, and for that, I am truly grateful. Human nature is exquisitely interesting and the aspect related to religion is even more complex. Ravilochan and Atanu, I found out, never stepped back from where they were standing to review their own standings. If they had done that (or are willing to do that even now), their visions will expand and they will see the big picture in a whole new light.